Jump to content


Save the 12 Trees on Rustlings Road - Please sign Petition

Recommended Posts

Small new ones do not support the wildlife or biodiversity that big ones do. They are not replacing like with like therefore SHOUTING about it makes you look a bit ignorant.

 

 

 

It's not just 12 though is it? They are being cut down right across the city.

 

...and replaced! (is that better taximan)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This post is typical of the whole thread. THEY ARE REPLACING THE OLD TREES WITH NEW ONE'S!

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think they replant a tree back in the exact same place that they remove one 100% of the time. Don't they use the fact that trees get planted to line certain spots like Catcliffe roundabout and the Parkway/M1 to excuse taking from estates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This post is typical of the whole thread. THEY ARE REPLACING THE OLD TREES WITH NEW ONE'S!

 

No they are not. I request that you refrain from continuing to spread untruth in the form of this misinformation. Saplings do not provide the same range, magnitude and value of ecosystem services as large crowned trees. 60 saplings vs 1 large crowned tree, is about the order of magnitude in difference. So we would need 60 saplings for every century old tree, for ACTUAL replacement of the benefits provided.

 

1 sapling for 1 century old tree is NOT REPLACEMENT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 sapling for 1 century old tree is not replacement!

 

Yes it is replacement. It's not like-for-like replacement because that's not possible, but yes it is replacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes it is replacement. It's not like-for-like replacement because that's not possible, but yes it is replacement.

 

No, you're right, it is not like-for-like replacement in any shape or form or by ANY stretch of the imagination. Century old trees CANNOT BE REPLACED, they are unavailable to buy - however rich someone might be. For this reason they are PRICELESS. And this council's negligent attitude toward them, is frankly obscene.

Edited by Mindfulness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...and replaced! (is that better taximan)

 

If you cannot keep up with the debate and continue to ignore the information and links posted by myself and others to make absurd statements like this I will leave you to your own devices.

I'm happy to debate sensibly but your contributions are beginning to have the look of someone who doesn't want to be confused by the FACTS because the mind has already been made up.

Come back to me and provide some evidence to substantiate what you are saying otherwise have the common sense to understand that you are only giving your opinion...and realise this is not the same as fact.

 

That's not too much to ask I hope. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you cannot keep up with the debate and continue to ignore the information and links posted by myself and others to make absurd statements like this I will leave you to your own devices.

I'm happy to debate sensibly but your contributions are beginning to have the look of someone who doesn't want to be confused by the FACTS because the mind has already been made up.

Come back to me and provide some evidence to substantiate what you are saying otherwise have the common sense to understand that you are only giving your opinion...and realise this is not the same as fact.

 

That's not too much to ask I hope. :)

OK if resorting to patronising comments make you feel better then feel free to continue the debate in that nature but I will not be bullied by anyone who's opinion I do not happen to agree with.

 

It is my opinion that the trees are a mess and have caused considerable damage to the environment and provide risk of injury. Your 'evidence' is all based on the fact you have a different opinion to me and therefore is biased to support your claim.

 

I do not believe our council would not go round cutting trees down without good reason and on this occasion I trust the expertise that they have at their disposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fact is that the relative changes to local atmospheric environment through the 12 trees on Rustling Road being felled are infinitesimally small.

 

Another fact is that good management of the roadside trees should never have allowed them to reach the size and condition that they are currently in.

 

Another fact is that any good future management will entail removal of some or all of those trees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK if resorting to patronising comments make you feel better then feel free to continue the debate in that nature but I will not be bullied by anyone who's opinion I do not happen to agree with.

 

It is my opinion that the trees are a mess and have caused considerable damage to the environment and provide risk of injury. Your 'evidence' is all based on the fact you have a different opinion to me and therefore is biased to support your claim.

 

I do not believe our council would not go round cutting trees down without good reason and on this occasion I trust the expertise that they have at their disposal.

 

Re my bold above.

 

It is now beyond all doubt to me that that is all you have...your own opinion based on...your own opinion.

 

I have given you hard evidence from other expert sources which you have chosen to completely ignore.

 

Trees do not harm the environment! To claim they do really illustrates your ignorance.

 

I will not be replying to any more of your posts on this subject. There are far better uses of my time.

 

---------- Post added 17-09-2015 at 21:02 ----------

 

A fact is that the relative changes to local atmospheric environment through the 12 trees on Rustling Road being felled are infinitesimally small.

 

Another fact is that good management of the roadside trees should never have allowed them to reach the size and condition that they are currently in.

 

Another fact is that any good future management will entail removal of some or all of those trees.

 

Sources please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that since 2008 Trees for cities .org has planted over 12,000 trees in Sheffield often in areas where the amount of trees has been generally lower that the area around Endcliffe Park.

I also see that Sheffield Council (with aid from others) has planted 50,000 trees in Sheffield this year.

Surely in an area with many existing trees in the park and the close proximity of many more (if the walk towards Wiremill Dam and those in Bingham Park behind the houses on Rustlings Road are included), the removal of 12 trees isn't going to threaten the atmosphere of the area.

Whilst in an ideal world they would be removed over a period of time we don't live in an ideal world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.